Stephanie wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:23 pm
No, it makes no difference to me, but I'm flagging because we have rules here about comments like that.
I'd much rather you engaged with Fishnut's argument rather than assuming she was arguing in bad faith.
Delete the comment if you think it breaches those rules. I'll take your comment on board although I'm a little surprised considering some of the other stuff I've seen posted here but never mind.
And I'm not going to waste my time debating anyone who covers the issue of sitting on a park bench for hours drink and smoking with "well there's no set definition of exercise "
I'm not even sure why I'm wasting my time writing this, but anyway. I entered this discussion in good faith. In return, Stranger Mouse has resorted to unprovoked requests for violence against the woman in the article, and slurs against my character and mental health status. He claimed without basis that the woman was a 5G conspiracist. He claimed that the woman was breaking the law which wasn't correct. The officer acknowledged that they had a difference in interpretation of the legislation and it's pretty clear that he was trying to find an excuse for her to be out that was more palatable to him. At no point did she go out of her way to harm, harass or infect anyone. She was polite and calm, she didn't raise her voice or even raise from sitting on the bench until she was escorted to the police van. The only people I saw contravening social distancing guidelines were the police officers who were repeatedly standing too close to each other when there was no obvious need. Why it took 4 officers to take in a single unresisting woman I don't know, but it sure seems like a case of police overreach to me. If Stranger Mouse wants to present some actual evidence then I'm willing to have my mind changed.
Stephanie wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 3:41 pm
Feel free to report any you see that concern you then.
And feel free to bring any evidence that supports your position, rather than just "tongue in cheek" aggression.
As stated several times the defence of smoking and drinking on a bench for hours by stating that exercise isn't precisely defined under the statute is a pretty good sign that I would be wasting my time in further debate.
There is scope for debate on the virtues of the police bothering people sat alone, vs focusing on large groups of people, and of the interpretation of legislation, vs comments by politicians which are different things.
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
If the police have just cleared everyone else from the area, there are obvious issues with consistency of enforcement if they let one of the people continue to sit there.
It's a tricky one, because she's obviously on a bit of a windup, and her behaviour is potentially dangerous (eg if smoking makes her cough body fluids onto the bench), but the law seems to be deliberately vague and toothless.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Meh. She's clearly an unpleasant anti-social person. There's a limited number of benches in pretty places in London and she's in clear breach of the intended rules. Whether the law permits arrest is ambiguous - hence the original friendly approach by the police was appropriate and her arrest hours later is a matter for the courts to determine the law.
But in a country of 70 million people there are plenty of selfish anti-social twunts. Many will be doing more damage than this individual idiot. I know of BBQs this weekend ("we'll all sit 2 metres apart so that's fine") and I know people visiting family for Easter. The police needs to be innovative and adaptable, rather than constantly reverting to pleasant duties of wandering parks and riverside walks in the sun. This is an easy time for police - no drunken punch ups, no abusive crowds. They need to stop playing in easy mode.
Hogging a bench for over an hour is clearly antisocial and I have no idea how many people would have liked to sit down but couldn't because she was there. But the legislation is incredibly vague. Nowhere does it say how long you can be out for or how often, even though the government guidance (which as far as I can tell has no legal status) says you can only go out once for one form of exercise (so technically if I go to walk the dog and then break into a run that contravenes the guidance).
The more I think about it the more I think she decided to challenge the police. The way she spoke, the fact she was ready to film them, the way she challenged them to cite the law she was actually breaking, it all suggests to me that she was expecting them to try and prosecute her under the new legislation. I may be being overly sympathetic but I have a vision of a woman who was on her way to do some shopping, who sat down for a bit to enjoy being outside and who was challenged by the police despite being well away from anyone else, who then decided that rather than go and do her shopping she'd stay and see what the police would do next.
From your transcript (thanks!) I thought she sounded a bit freeman-on-the-landish ("Is that a demand or a request?") etc. Those guys are always going out trying to wind up cops and film the results for youtube.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Bird on a Fire wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:11 pm
From your transcript (thanks!) I thought she sounded a bit freeman-on-the-landish ("Is that a demand or a request?") etc. Those guys are always going out trying to wind up cops and film the results for youtube.
Yeah I picked up on that. The tenor of the conversation can be seen in many of the FoTL videos.
One thing that should be clear though, she was arrested for not giving her name and address under standard evidence legislation NOT on the new coronavirus act.
They interpreted exercise to mean she wasn't out legitimately and after repeat calls to go home, and informing her the next step was a fixed penalty, she won't leave. It was then in the issuing of the FPN that her refusal to give her name and address which could be enforced by arresting her.
The cops are trying not to escalate and spend ages ramping up. They even asked however cursorily about domestic abuse. She wanted to be arrested, a fun entertainment for the evening. I don't wish her anything but that which the law dictates but she does seem massively dickish.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
Bird on a Fire wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:11 pm
From your transcript (thanks!) I thought she sounded a bit freeman-on-the-landish ("Is that a demand or a request?") etc. Those guys are always going out trying to wind up cops and film the results for youtube.
Her YouTube channel gives a flavour of her thought processes. I haven't watched all the 5G and Flat Earth videos but this one makes clear if you watch it to the end that she thinks the whole Covid 19 thing is a fuss over nothing and possibly doesn't exist at all.
Bird on a Fire wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:11 pm
From your transcript (thanks!) I thought she sounded a bit freeman-on-the-landish ("Is that a demand or a request?") etc. Those guys are always going out trying to wind up cops and film the results for youtube.
Yeah I picked up on that. The tenor of the conversation can be seen in many of the FoTL videos.
One thing that should be clear though, she was arrested for not giving her name and address under standard evidence legislation NOT on the new coronavirus act.
They interpreted exercise to mean she wasn't out legitimately and after repeat calls to go home, and informing her the next step was a fixed penalty, she won't leave. It was then in the issuing of the FPN that her refusal to give her name and address which could be enforced by arresting her.
The cops are trying not to escalate and spend ages ramping up. They even asked however cursorily about domestic abuse. She wanted to be arrested, a fun entertainment for the evening. I don't wish her anything but that which the law dictates but she does seem massively dickish.
She seems to be a fan of being quoted on UKColumn.org - are they FreemenOfTheLandish? I just scanned their website which seems a bit new world order / deep state orientated
In the video she likes so much the guy gets all the way to the end before mentioning Magna Carta after discussing kidnapping grannies and kids
